Is the original Crash trilogy worth playing? How does the remake compare?
>>112543681 is worth playing for 10 minutes because it's quite charming. Playing through? No. Just not well designed or polished enough.
>>11254368The ultimate Crash guide is as follows: Play 2 and ignore the rest
Remake has a notoriously unreliable hitbox issue.
>>11254368>>11254384There is some analog support issues with 2, some versions don't have it or people can't figure out how to do it. Unironically maybe just play the remakes.>>11254392Only the first game afaik.
>>11254368I was a Nintendo kid, so I never grew up with Crash, but played through the remakes in anticipation of Crash 4. They're decent and short enough if you're a normal person who plays games until the credits roll and then stops. They're crack cocaine if you're a giga autist who needs to 100% complete things. I personally like how focused and difficult Crash 1 is, but most people will reasonably vouch for Crash 2 being the best. Not sure the consensus on Crash 3, but I felt it was very much jumping the shark with how many gameplay gimmicks they threw in. A fun game for sure, but I thought it went overboard and kind of forgot it was a platformer.
Remake is shit. Play the originals. 1 is clunky and difficult but still good. 2 is a masterpiece. 3 is basically 2 but with a few shitty minigame/gimmick levels.
The original trilogy looks better but the new games are better because of their accessibility. Although the trilogy is perfectly playable on Backwards Compatibility on PS2/PS3
i played the shit out of the originals as a kid and i still love themi tried playing the remakes, they are good, but perhaps more if you aren't already so used to the originals. i say this because the physics are different enough that i'm constantly thrown off as i do something i know should work but just doesn't. i didn't have this problem so much with the spyro remakes, since they don't require so much precision (at least as far as a casual player of the originals go)i do like that the multiple-fruit boxes are reduced from 10 to 5, and i like those extra challenge levels they added in. i'm sure i could get used to it
>>112543681 is clunky and hard (lose track for gems if you die in levels)2 is the best3 has some minigames but is still good
I love the original trilogy and had fun with the remaster.If you like platformers, give it a try.
If you like 3D platformers then yes, the originals are well worth playing. Don't listen to anyone saying they are hard, even 100%'ing the first game is enjoyable. Surely they can be challenging but some of the anons here would make you think they are like Battletoads or some shit, this is straight up not true and don't let this discourage you
>>11254947This is true. Crash, at times, demands perfection, but only for a few short moments.
Of course the classic trilogy is worth playing. Crash is a classic series for a reason.
yesworse
>>11254368Hot take but no. Crash is a "3D" game that is more like Subway Surfers or at best isometric games. It's still decently made for what it is, it's not some shitty yuro/amerijank or anything, and it has some charm to it; but it's a "you had to be there" game. It seems that the only people who cling to it are those who grew up with it, and furries. I had more fun with 2D PS1 games than Crash 1— unironically, Tomba, MMX4 and SotN were far better and kept me hooked till the end. To me this is NOT a good thing to say about a 3D game.
>>11255308maybe you just don't like more arcade-like gamescrash 1-3 are not and don't claim to be open-world or have players alter the progression or anything like that, they're a set of mostly disparate levels where the goal is to get to the end. obstacle courses more or lessif you're expecting mario 64 but playstation, you'll probably be disappointed, because it's not that, instead you should be thinking "sonic, but 3d"
>>11255308>it's a "you had to be there" gamebeing that i was there my opinion may be biased, but imo that phrase strongly suggests that the thing in question is difficult to understand outside of the time and place it was inand while yes the gameplay more closely lined up with existing and older 2D games than more groundbreaking games like sm64, that doesn't mean such gameplay is particularly unusual today, there's still plenty of games that have the basic formula of simply getting to the end of a stage, with the fun being from the challenges places in the level that make getting to the end difficult, crash is a very simple game conceptually, it's basically super mario or sonic (the 8/16bit ones) but in a different perspective, not groundbreaking from a gameplay perspective, but also not something foreign today, either
>>11255308>>11255329oh unless you mean the love for them specifically was something you had to be there to understand, which i suppose you could say that, objectively speaking i don't think there's anything particularly unique about them outside of the time they were made, but at the same time you could say that about most old games. it's harder to appreciate old stuff you aren't familiar with like someone who is familiar with it can
>>11255325I never said I expected "open world" or "progression", though I guess comparing Crash to Tomba or SotN is apples to oranges. I just mean that sincerely, I had more fun playing 2D "obstacle course" games than Crash, and I'm not even a huge fan of those. Crash is like a very weird mix of Western platformer vibes from SNES and even NES eras. It's not tight enough to be an arcade-y platformer, yet it has no exploration of 3D platformers.>Sonic but 3DYou what? I kind of get what you mean, it's closer to an arcade style game, but that's where similarities end.
>>11255348>You what? I kind of get what you mean, it's closer to an arcade style game, but that's where similarities end.that comparison is not something i made up, it was something naughty dog (the developer) called it as well, it was jokingly called "sonics ass" by them as well since a sonic game where the camera is behind the character would be looking at the characters ass the whole time. this is why crash regularly turns to look at the camera for various things like the beginning/end of stages, returning to a checkpoint, etc, so you can actually see his face sometimeseven something as seemingly simple as turning sonic into a 3d game wasn't as easy or obvious as it seems todaymaybe crash1-3 are boring and simple to someone who is new to it, i don't know. maybe you see it like i see say super mario bros. 1, being that i'm too young to have played that when it was new, i too have always appreciated what it brought to gaming, but still consider it too simple, like i'd already played games that took and and added much more to the formula, which makes the original seem lacking
>>11255348>>11255370the more i think about it, the more i see your point. the main novelty of the game is the 3d perspective, something which is benign today. it's otherwise not substantially different to any other 2d platformer. for example there's little exploration or puzzles you'd find in later 3d platformers, it was designed to be very easy to understand (though there are additional challenges beside just getting to the end, like the gems for breaking all the boxes or not dying in a stage, time trials, etc)
Is the Crash remake much uglier like the Spyro one?
>>11256259No. Spyro's team completely missed the assignment.
>>11256259Visually the Crash remakes are no where near as much of a downgrade as the Spyro remakes are. It lacks the contrast of the originals and some areas, like the ruins levels in 1 or the sewer levels in 2, lack the detail of the originals, but it overall looks just about the same and doesn't really fuck anything up offensively. It also doesn't make every NPC and enemy into a hideous disgusting gremlin like the Spyro remakes which is a major plus.
I liked Crash 2 the most but it has one of the most anticlimactic and disappointing final bosses ever. Man.
>>11254458getting the special gems in 2 is horseshit
>>11255325>"sonic, but 3d"I actually think Spyro is far closer to Sonic but 3d than Crash ever was. Spyro is decently fast, far faster than Crash or any other 3d platformers at the time besides Sonic, there are parts of the level designed around high speed running/platforming with the egg thieves. And the lead designer also worked on Sonic 2 to boot.
>>11256523You have poor perception skills. Every single special gem has a hint for how to get it. Learn how to examine your surroundings and find out what looks "off."
>>11256546spyro came out 2 years after crash, so it's not really a good comparison, i agree crash doesn't have the speed aspect of sonic, i mention it specifically because that's what the devs say was something they were thinking about at the timein terms of speed and who jumping on boxes thing, it ended up more "mario, but 3d", you just have to think about it in the context of it being before mario 64
>>11256627nigga there is a single wall you can walkthrough in the entire game hiding a gem
>>11256259The Crash remake is honestly not that bad graphics-wise, it even preserves the color palette for the most partBut what they did with Spyro is just comical, they massacred those games so hard Reignited genuinely feels like a fake techdemo made to laugh at shitty remakes
>>11257247I would have used the blue gem as a better example of one that is bullshit to get.The green one at least gives a hint in that it's weird that there's a room full of nitros protecting "nothing".
The shit in Crash 2 where you have to do the extensive backtracking on the monkeybars in the sewer level to get the extra gem is nightmarish
>>11257301I don't even remember what that is. The box gem in Cold Hard Crash was the worst thing in the entire series until IAT came along and every other level was just like that.
First time playing Crash games? It doesn't matter, both versions are pretty competent so it depends what you find more convenient Did you actually play the original games years ago?N-sane trilogy changes some hitboxes, physics and how the controls work, which could trigger your autism. I honestly prefer the N-sane trilogy because it is more convenient for me and I don't care that much about Crash in the first place, it is just a nice platformer that I've beaten twice and that's it
>>11257301>>11257926Been very long since the last time I played it but the worst box gem was in one of the levels with the bees
>>11257254lolwat? nta, but I figured out the blue gem as a kid.
play the original versions of 2 and 3, they're arguably the best looking 5th gen games produced and they're simply more appealing to look at than the trilogy, much better color/contrast. the original 1 is a bit ugly being a 1996 game so I wouldn't blame you for trying out the trilogy version of that in terms of visuals but it has a hitbox issue that or may not have been resolved.
>>11254368With this hack https://www.romhacking.net/hacks/8662/ unless you prefer the much tighter nastiness of the OG Crash 1's difficulty, you basically only play N.Sane Trilogy for full game Coco or seeing the classics reimagined. In terms of overall gameplay the OG trilogy is way tighter, and I'd say the more limited PS1 design and aesthetics are just a lot more charming overall in my opinion. If someone could mod NST a bit more for hitbox refinements and undoing some weird design choices, mixed with classic sounds and the full proper versions of the music tracks the composer had instead of the compressed PS1 stuff (already a mod for that at least), then I'd think NST could stand up better for enthusiasts.
>>11257247>green gemThe room in question holds absolutely nothing other than one extra life and a stack of nitro boxes. Why would the nitro boxes extend throughout the entire room unless they were hiding something?>>11257254>blue gemThe box counter at the end of the level literally says */0 where * is the number of boxes you broke. Pretty obvious clue here. Even more obvious than the green gem.
